This is my first contribution to this forum and first of all I want to thank Mostapha and the people around him for this superb piece of software. I use it right from the beginning and try to learn the new [+] version.
I have the following problem. I did set up an image based simulation and did not find a possibility to change the resolution of the rendering. In HoneybeePlus_View I can add _xResolution and _yResolution and this information is writte to the view file. But this does not change the resolutiuon of my picture. As far as I know the core radiance system does not recognice the -x and -y parameter in the view file. So I am shure I am on the wrong track.
Thany you for any idea
Martin
Hi @martin.klingler ,
Can you please post the .bat file that is inside your project directory (that is written by HB) ? This, most likely, is an issue with the API. Based on your question I am not sure if the issue relates to a conventional Radiance simulation or a matrix-based simulation.
Typically, the -x and -y values inside a view file are redundant for Radiance programs such as rvu, rpict etc. The matrix-based methods implemented inside HB[+] use vwrays and rcontrib . The Radiance command for creating images using matrices is something like this.
Sarith
cc: @mostapha, I think we might have missed out on passing on -x -y values assigned externally by the user.
1 Like
Hi Sarith,
what I tried is an image based point in time simulation and this is the command.bat file.
commands.bat (667 Bytes)
Many thanks
Martin
Hi @martin.klingler ,
So, the issue is that the rpict command is not getting the resolution values (-x and -y) assigned through grasshopper at present:
c:\radiance\bin\rpict -aa 0.25 -dj 0.0 -lr 4 -ad 512 -ps 8 -ar 16 -lw 0.05 -as 128 -ab 2 -pj 0.6 -dc 0.25 -dp 64 -ss 0.0 -pt 0.15 -dt 0.5 -dr 0 -ds 0.5 -st 0.85 -vf view\P1.vf Test_Mat01.oct > result\P1.hdr
A quick hack to fix this would be to add the values for x and y resolution manually in the batch file (in the case below I am trying to create a 1000x1000 pixel image. The final image would be clipped on the basis of -vv and -vh in the view file):
c:\radiance\bin\rpict -x 1000 -y 1000 -aa 0.25 -dj 0.0 -lr 4 -ad 512 -ps 8 -ar 16 -lw 0.05 -as 128 -ab 2 -pj 0.6 -dc 0.25 -dp 64 -ss 0.0 -pt 0.15 -dt 0.5 -dr 0 -ds 0.5 -st 0.85 -vf view\P1.vf Test_Mat01.oct > result\P1.hdr
The point-in-time simulations in HB[+] and HB are almost the same, as this still uses the decades old way that involves ambient caching. Actually, HB is slightly better implementation, because Mostapha has implemented an overture pass in that (Page 62 in this presentation from John Mardaljevic. You might already be aware of this, I am just adding the link so that others too know what I am referring to).
Till this lapse in the API for HB[+] gets fixed, I would recommend using HB for point-in-time simulations. You can find a simple Hydra example here.
Sarith
Hi Sarith,
thank you very much for your answer. I am using the HB[+] because of some special material definitions I already did for the HB[+] way. But I have no problem to add the additional parameters into the command.bat. I wanted to be shure not to run a wrong track.
Martin
Thank you both! I opened an issue so we don’t forget to fix this.